MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383370705 · doi:10.5194/ems2023-460

Promises and limitations of machine-learning-based methods for satellite retrieval of solar surface irradiance

2023· preprint· en· W4383370705 on OpenAlexaff
Hadrien Verbois, Vadim Becquet, Yves‐Marie Saint‐Drenan, Benoît Gschwind, Philippe Blanc

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSolar Radiation and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSatelliteComputer scienceSolar irradianceIrradianceRadianceRemote sensingCloud computingArtificial intelligenceMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceMachine learningData miningGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate estimations of Surface Solar Irradiance (SSI) are of high interest in domains as varied as climatology, solar energy, architecture, and agriculture. SSI estimations derived from meteorological satellites enable continuous spatial and temporal coverage and have thus become an important source of information standardly used for the planning, operation, and forecast of the production of PV power systems. To infer SSI from satellite images is, however, not straightforward; since the eighties, multiple satellite-based retrieval approaches have been proposed, from the earlier cloud index methods to physically based ones. Recent approaches are emerging based on machine learning (ML), inferring a direct data-driven model between images acquired from satellite and SSI ground measurements. Although only a few such works have been published, their practical efficiency has already been questioned. The objective of this paper is not to propose a new ML-based method but to better understand the promises and limitations of this new coming family of methods. To do so, we implement simple multi-layer-perceptron models with different training datasets of satellite-based radiance measurements from Meteosat Second Generation (MSG) with collocated SSI ground measurements. To test the model's ability to generalize in time and space, we use different locations and time periods for training and testing. How we allocate measurement stations to each group is also a crucial factor. To understand our model behavior, we study two setups. In the first setup, stations are randomly assigned to each group, resulting in distinct but spatially interlaced training and test stations. In the second setup, we enforced strict and large geographical separation, allowing us to evaluate the model's performance in locations outside its training area. In both cases, the performance of the ML-based retrieval model is compared to that of the operational CAMS radiation service (CRS), which is based on Heliosat-4, a state-of-the-art physical retrieval model. Our results show that the data-driven model’s performance can be much better than CRS but is very dependent on the training set, raising problems of generalization. Indeed, in the first setup, the ML model has a Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) almost 20% lower than CRS, but in the second training setup – when training and test stations are geographically separated, CRS RMSE is only 4% higher. Perhaps more critically, in the first setup, the ML model RMSE is lower or comparable to that of CAMS for all test stations but in the setup enforcing geographical separation, the ML model underperforms dramatically for several test locations. ML models have great potential for satellite retrieval, but their inability to generalize in certain configurations could be critical and hinder their deployment to regions with sparse measurement networks. A hybrid approach combining data-driven and physical models seems to be of interest for further research activities.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.755

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.122
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSolar Radiation and PhotovoltaicsFrench-language works237,207